In today's dynamic, fast-paced environment, it is desirable to securely manage the expeditious exchange of ever-increasing amounts of on-demand information within fluid Communities of Interest (COIs). COIs include entities such as companies, agencies, organizations, and groups of entities such as governments and militaries (e.g., branches within a single government or between multiple governments). The Information Assurance (IA) solution used preferably provides the capability of sharing data (e.g., electronically) at the information/data object level (Information Centric Security or INFOCENSEC) across functions and organizations throughout an enterprise while providing data separation and confidentiality.
While electronic communication has benefits, electronic communication also has concerns, particularly in the area of protecting its confidentiality, integrity and its authenticity. This is compounded when dealing with multinational entities or multiple entities such as companies, agencies, or organizations with various levels of trust that desire to share information securely. Access to the message (i.e., plaintext information) is preferably controlled so that only those individuals authorized with a “need-to-know” are granted access to the plaintext information.
Techniques for addressing electronic communication security exist today. One technique uses cryptography to provide privacy and data integrity. Cryptography involves the conversion of data into a secret code that can either be transmitted over an electronic communication medium (e.g., LAN, WAN, Internet, etc.) or stored on a memory device (e.g., hard drive, USB Fob, CD, etc.). The original text, or “plaintext,” is converted into a coded equivalent called “ciphertext” at the producer (e.g., author) via an encoding device that incorporates an encryption algorithm with a predetermined sequence of steps. A plaintext is not necessarily composed of text, but may include text or graphics or other forms of information, and may be combinations of forms of information or a single form of information by itself. Many different algorithms exist and each algorithm uses a string of bits known as a “key” to perform the calculations. The larger the key (the more bits), the greater the number of potential patterns can be created, thus making it harder to break the code and descramble the contents. The data are encrypted, or “locked,” by combining the bits in the key mathematically with the data bits. If the ciphertext message is intercepted (either during transit or at rest) by an unauthorized entity, the message is essentially worthless to the intruder, who does not possess the means to decrypt the encrypted message. Members of COIs often share information that has been encrypted to help ensure the safe transfer and storage of information. COI members are members of cryptographic domains, with members of each domain using a common set of cryptographic parameters for an encryption algorithm, e.g., which base values are used in cryptography.
On the receiving side (e.g., consumer) of an encrypted communication, a decoding device or decrypting engine is provided. The decoding device accepts the ciphertext message and the same cryptographic key that was used during the encryption process is used to decode (decrypt) the ciphertext and turn it back into a plaintext message that corresponds to the original message.
The manner in which the key and the algorithm are applied in a communication process, and the manner in which the keys are managed, define a cryptographic scheme. There are many conventional cryptographic schemes in use today. The two most popular of these are public-key cryptography and Pretty Good Privacy (PGP). The keys used in these schemes incorporate a combination of a public key component that is available to anyone who wants to encrypt (e.g., a producer) a message, and a private key component that is typically held by the recipient (e.g., a consumer) to decrypt the ciphertext back to the original plaintext message.
There are a number of considerations for determining whether a particular cryptographic scheme is desirable for the application in which it is to be used. For example, the following may be considered.
1. The degree of difficulty to defeat the cryptography. This refers to the amount of effort required for an unauthorized entity to decrypt the ciphertext message. To improve the security of the cryptographic scheme is to reduce the likelihood that a valid key can be stolen, calculated, or discovered (e.g., compromised). The more difficult it is for an unauthorized entity to obtain a valid key, the more secure the cryptographic scheme.
2. The means to dynamically add, update and/or revoke a member's access (i.e., retract an entity's access privileges). Revocation refers to preventing access to material encrypted subsequent to revocation, even though access to material encrypted during a member's period of legitimate access may not be stopped. Once the decision to revoke (i.e., to remove access to some portion of the member's access or completely remove the member from accessing any/all protected data) is made, new encryption/decryption access denial should be as complete and rapid as security risks warrant. The timeliness of distributing entity updates/revocation may greatly affect the security of the cryptographic scheme.
3. Whether the cryptographic key management scheme supports cross-domain (e.g., different cryptographic domains) information sharing and can provide persistent access control to the cryptographic keys for the ciphertext message. The assured information-sharing cornerstone is to provide the ability to dynamically share information at multiple sensitivity (e.g., classification) levels among various entities such as countries, organizations, agencies, etc. Information access may be based on mission need, information sensitivity, entity's identity and privileges, and level of protection provided by an entity's environment.
4. Scalability. There are many aspects of scalability to be considered in evaluating key management systems, such as: Generation, distribution, revocation and recovery of keying material; re-key interval (i.e., crypto period); updating and maintaining keys for users including users changing roles within a community of interest (COD) as well as adding/changing/revoking of access requirements, e.g., on an as-needed basis; COI interoperability, including multiple nations as well as cooperative COIs; access control to content at the object level; and support for dynamic resource management.